Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract:

Sowa Rigpa’s center-periphery dynamics are more evident in the untold lives of its practitioners than in the analytical study of this Tibeto-Himalayan medical system. Its marginalized practitioners participate in the anthropologist’s quest for knowledge. What is and ought to be at stake for both?

Contribution long abstract:

This reflexive essay on the evolving roles of an anthropologist therefore delves into the creation of spaces between activism, personal accountability, and friendship with marginalized communities. Sowa Rigpa medical practitioners (amchi)in the remote regions of Kinnaur and Spiti (Western Himalayas, India) face many challenges, including livelihood, knowledge transmission, and medical legitimacy. A state-led paradigm shift towards modern scientific principles complicates these issues further, along with a focus on institutionally driven research and education. Amchi, their patients, and relatives are increasingly summoned by scientists and anthropologists to participate in documentation and modernization efforts. Still, they also express a meta-narrative that speaks of their frustrations and exhaustion in being approached as subjects of study, not catalysts for policy change or welfare.

Taking a theoretical cue from Gayatri Spivak and her work “Can the Subaltern Speak?” my paper reflects on if the Sub-Altern can indeed speak, who do they want as listeners? What does listening entail, and how can the anthropologist be a conduit for catharsis? What do they want to be done with the things they say? Emphasizing a self-reflective stance, I shift the focus to the questions posed by the people I work with, rather than on predefined research inquiries. I also draw on emotional conversations and Buddhist teachings that led me to dissect my own institutional privilege with the marginalization of ‘non-institutionally trained’ amchi.